Abortion and the Planned Parenthood Videos

All stages of human life are in fact human life.  You can’t have one stage without a previous stage.  A 20 week old fetus can’t exist without having first been a zygote.  A newborn baby can’t exist without having first been a 20 week old fetus.  A toddler can’t exist without having first been a newborn baby.  A 10 year old child can’t exist without having first been a toddler.  A teenager can’t exist without having first been a 10 year old.  An adult can’t exist without having first been a teenager.

And obviously therefore, an adult can’t exist without first having been a zygote, a 20-week old fetus, a newborn baby, a toddler, a 10-year-old child, a teenager.

So if you are fine with taking human life at certain stages, why aren’t you fine with taking human life at other stages – teenagers, elderly?  Why is it morally acceptable at one stage and not another?   A human life growing inside a woman is not an elective organ of hers. It is a separate human life that will one day grow through all of the stages you were blessed to grow through yourself.  Unless someone takes that unborn baby’s life.

People who claim the Planned Parenthood videos are heavily edited and doctored are adopting a defensive posture that concedes the videos are so awful they MUST be doctored.  So once these people accept the FACT that they were simply edited for time (and the full length videos show the same content), then these people therefore accept that the content is awful and reflects Planned Parenthood’s lack of humanity.

Taking the life of an unborn baby at any stage is unacceptable in my book, but even more so when they are fully formed and feel pain.  To say otherwise shows no respect at all for human life.  

Planned Parenthood is not the only place in this country where women (including poor women) can receive health care.  For one thing, didn’t Obamacare and massive subsidies ensure that people who can’t pay for health care don’t have to worry about that anymore?  So why should tax payers have to pay for other people’s health care, AND fund Planned Parenthood?  Especially when people like me, and a lot of people in this country, are fundamentally opposed to abortion. 

Incidentally - people who say tax payer money doesn't go towards abortions don't understand business and finance.  If a donation of money to a business allows it to operate, then that donation props up all aspects of that business.  You can't pour a bucket of water into a pool and assure me that water will remain in the deep end.

There are thousands of free health care clinics across the country that assist poor people, without any ties to abortion.  Many of those clinics receive no federal funding and rely on charitable donations and state funding.  The clinics are undeniably underfunded, considering the millions of people they see annually and the millions they have to turn away.  Why shouldn’t tax payer money go to those non-profit clinics instead of Planned Parenthood? 

You’d have a hard time convincing me that Planned Parenthood’s 700 clinics are somehow more important and more deserving of federal funding than the thousands of free non-profit clinics in this country.   

Planned Parenthood performs more abortions annually than France, Germany, and Canada combined.  In many other western countries, abortions are outlawed after the first trimester.  But not here in America.  Killing a baby in the womb that can feel pain, and that has limbs, heart, lungs, liver, brain – why should Americans be bothered by something so trivial… Well, it bothers the conscience of other countries.

Political Correctness - Disarming Teachers of Their Only Defense

First of all, I admit that I would be horrified on my child’s behalf if they were placed in handcuffs at school over a misunderstanding.  It would make me angry and would break my heart.  But those feelings would be short-lived after the details of the situation came to light.  Because as parents, we are faced with the overwhelming need and desperate desire to keep our children safe.  And as gun-free zones, schools are tasked with the heavy responsibility of keeping our children safe with no defense mechanisms. 

We know all too well that tragedies happen at schools at the hands of mentally sick and depraved people.  Our children (and their teachers) are sitting ducks, spending their days in known gun-free zones with no armed guards.  They can become target practice for soulless monsters wanting an easy way to get in the news.  Guns, bombs, knives – there are many ways to wreak destruction and tragedy upon defenseless people.  So many schools have implemented zero-tolerance policies for potential threats.

Macarthur High School in Irving Texas has a zero tolerance policy.  The teacher did exactly what she should have done.  The school district and the Mayor are all in agreement on this matter.  According to the teacher, she heard a beeping noise in her classroom, and someone brought her this case, with wires coming out attached to a timer.  Now, I’m no bomb expert.  But if I was a teacher and someone brought this to me, I certainly wouldn’t assume it was harmless.  Teachers have to be hyper-aware of any potential dangers.  This more than qualifies as such. 

So people that are upset that this 14-year-old child was placed in an uncomfortable, unfortunate and temporary position need to ask themselves – would it have been better for the teacher to ignore a potential threat?  Should she have taken his word that the clock was harmless?  Again, this was not a standard clock in appearance.  It was a small metal case, with wires attached to a timer (yes, wires attached to a timer describes a clock, but also describes a bomb).  I would much rather apologize over a misunderstanding than be responsible for the deaths of untold numbers of children.  So I applaud the teacher for looking out for the safety of the children she’s entrusted to protect with just her bare hands and observation skills.

Obviously, officials and experts figured out it was not a bomb, but the fact that it resembled a bomb was in violation of their zero tolerance policy.  Let’s keep in mind that a 10-year-old child was suspended for 3 days in Ohio last year for forming his hand into the shape of a gun….  This year, a 6-year-old boy in Colorado Springs was suspended for the same thing.  Clearly not a gun.  But they were suspended because their schools have zero tolerance policies when it comes to potential threats.  But when confronted with this suspicious looking device – the teacher should turn the other way?  In a zero-tolerance school?  For the sake of political correctness?  It’s not a drawing of a bomb, or someone saying “boom.”  It was a device.  Of course the student said it was a clock and not a bomb, just as the other kids said “it’s just my hand, not a gun.” 

A high school teacher with no knowledge of bombs, armed only with observation skills and an awareness of potential threats, decided better safe than sorry.  And now she’s being labeled a bigot and Islamophobic because of her concern for safety. 

So we need to ask ourselves as a country – are we not only willing to send our children to defenseless places every day, but we are also willing to place one child’s feelings and political correctness above the safety of our children?  I for one, am not.  I also firmly believe that the teacher would have pursued the exact some course of events if the student was named John Smith and was white as white can be.  After all, deranged white kids are the ones who typically bring tragedy to schools in America.

The President, as well as throngs of social media supporters, have come out in support of the 14-year-old student Ahmed Mohamed.  I don't mind the social media outpouring of emotion that will be forgotten by next week.  I mind the President bringing national attention to this case, turning it into yet another way to divide Americans.  Not only does it contribute to divisive rhetoric, but it contributes to the idea that teachers must now look the other way in cases of potential threats, lest they be thrown into the national spotlight in an unflattering way. 

I admitted that I would be upset as Ahmed’s parent that he was put into cuffs.  I don’t know all the rules and regulations in that state and school district, but the handcuffs do seem extreme.  But I would also take this as a learning opportunity.  What happened to children learning difficult lessons in life?  If a school has a zero-tolerance policy regarding potential threats, i.e. weapons and bombs, I would have advised my child to make sure to let the school know about the device in advance - especially since it wasn't being taken to school during a science fair.  And since that lesson wasn’t taught in advance, and the child was forced to endure the consequences at school and with the police, then the lesson should be enforced afterwards.  In the future, it’s best to make sure your school officials and teachers know about things like this in advance, when you're bringing something to school that is not school related.  

Don't get me wrong - I applaud his scientific and creative mind, and his thirst for knowledge.  We DO need more of that.  But clearing things with your school in advance is a wise policy.
    

This situation could be made into a lesson for any other students in the country looking to bring a fake or actual bomb to their school – don’t do it, because you’ll be caught and there will be consequences.  Instead, the President and the rest of the country decided to make this into a lesson on political correctness, in turn opening the door for even more threats at our schools where teachers’ observation skills are the only defense, and now even those can’t be used.

For the record, the image at the top of this blog is the clock that the teacher found to be suspicious.  I understand that Obama has invited Ahmed to the White House with this device.  But I’m 100% certain that if Ahmed tried to take a tour of the White House with this device in tow a month ago before anyone knew of his story, the Secret Service would NOT have turned the other way.  They would NOT have assumed it was harmless.  The President gets the benefit of "better safe than sorry", but apparently our children in public schools do not.